Getting up close: Canon EF-M 28mm macro hands-on review

Hands-on review: Canon EF-M 28mm Macro

This is the Canon EF-M 28mm F3.5 Macro IS STM. It is a compact, light weight, close-focusing lens designed exclusively for Canon's EOS M lineup. It's image-stabilized and uses a quiet stepping motor mechanism for autofocus. It's priced at $299.

Comments

Canon's EF-M 28mm f-3.5 macro lens will prove to be more popular than all of the APS-C mirrorless competition's f-1.8 and f-2.8 primes combined, regardless of cost. Why? Because this lens is going to be more fun to use than any of those (yawn) fast primes. :))

Although I agree that the lens's 28mm (45mm equivalent) focal length results in shorter-than-desirable macro working distances, it has the corresponding advantage of placing the lights that are built into the lens farther off-axis from the lens itself. That may produce appreciably more pleasant lighting of small subjects.

Brilliant idea. I hope Canon will improve upon this in-lens lighting concept and introduce it to the EF line (of some lenses, especially macro lenses, and a similar 28/35mm EF).Great lens when you don't have, or can't carry the billows and the macro ring light, especially!

"The MTF-50 result - better correlated with perceived sharpness - tells a slightly different story, indicating only around 875 line pairs per picture height resolved, which translates to ~4.6MP, or 19% of the total sensor resolution."

the M3 sensor is AA based 6000x4000 or 3000x2000 line pairs .. as it's maximum possible (less of course for the AA filter unless you are doing deconvolution filtering)

so wouldn't 875 be much larger than 19% of total resolving?

So I'm curious because 875lp/ph on an M3 sensor would render it .. well, as a piece of crap. and by your infinity pictures, it seems to be resolving far more than 875 would suggest.

this is a new lens test setup is it not? do you guys have an explanation on how you are testing and what you are using as a baseline?

default jpg will play a big role in determining what you come up with as an example, it would be interesting if we had as an comparison, even on the M3 - ie: this compared to the 22mm as far as your MTF setup.

Why did DPR compare this lens to a Nikon DSLR-lens? It's not even close apples to apples comparison, now is it? There exist a mirrorless aps-c lens with almost the same FOV, same price-point, same maximum aperture, same size, same weight, same target group and yes macro too. Sony E-mount 30mm macro would have been a natural comparison.

I'd probably prefer it if they justified going all the way to MTF 10 rather than picking something on the way, as people who play about with this stuff a lot more than I do suggest MTF 10 really doesn't represent perceived fine-detail sharpness as much as you'd (and I'd) expect. How about 25?

The experience of the reviewer at DPR was quite different to my own. This is an amazingly useful lens and out of thousands of shots with it, I've experienced no vignetting and it's perfectly useful handheld... even with just the Ring Light. I also find the images sharper for non-macro pictures (eg architecture) than the 22mm f/2 lens they suggested as a substitute. In low light, yes... that f/2 is surprisingly useful.

I've always wanted a wide-angle Macro lens after seeing the results taken in the Jungle by entomologists and this really does a fine job. There's a few examples from this new lens in my DPR gallery and a few more that I've posted in related threads when I wrote my own review of this lens. It's a somewhat unique lens with useful applications and it takes good photograph.

I like to shoot interior details in low light. How does AF work with this lens? I have an 18-55 kit lens which has useless AF in low light. (The 22 2.0 however is fine)

One gripe: Manual focus with ef-m, in general, is a royal pain. Need a real barrel focus ring, distance scale, and it would be helpful to have a magnified window inside the image for focus-as opposed to a huge full screen magnified unreferenced jump where you have to hunt for an edge.

I personally don't get the fuzz about EVF resp. viewfinders in general. I never missed an viewfinder on my EOS M. Framing and focusing is a real joy with that touch sensitive and articulating screen in contrast to my DSLR. But I partly may feel that way because I am wearing specs and looking through the VF is like looking through a keyhole because I never see the whole frame.

I will say the external EVF on my GF1 was always pretty annoying, both getting lost, needing a bigger case and getting banged into things. I'm happy with the EOS-M3 as it is (I'm not the target audience) but if they come out with a more serious model I would like a good built-in EVF then.

I own this lens for my M3 and I assure you that there is less there than meets the eye (of DPR). The LED's do seem to help focus in Super Macro mode but otherwise do not seem to have any effect, esp. on exposure which is sad. The filter/led cover is clumsy and I at least have not ever gotten a sharp shot in the SM mode handheld, regardless of the IS. It is a typical Canon 2 steps forward 1 step backwards product, IMO.

From the article above (page 3):"Sadly, there's no ability to have just one LED on at full brightness and the other dimmed."

An easy fix for this is to get some 1 stop and/or 2 stop ND gel filter material (no need to spring for optical quality, unless you like throwing away money) and carefully cut it out into a 'C' shape to cover half of the ring light. Stick it on with some clear removable tape, and boom, you have more control over your "main" and "fill" lights. You are welcome.

While this looks like a great option, I'm a bit baffled on the 28mm focal length. First, because it's just REALLY wide for a macro and forces extremely close working range. And second because this is only the second prime in EF-M mount and the other one is a 22mm. So this provides zero utility as a non-macro for most EOS M shooters. If it was a 55-60mm macro, it could double as a portrait lens and make a nice pair for the 22mm in a 2-prime kit. But who wants to carry a 22-28 pair of primes?

It's not a full-frame camera. The 22 is a 35 mm wide angle, the 28 is a 45 mm standard macro. Okay its not the most humongous difference, but making longer lenses in native EFM mount makes little sense when you can just use the EF mount adapter.

Even if I can agree that 45mm equiv could be interesting in the right hands, I still think it is odd to branch out to "interesting" lenses when your lens lineup is so small.

And if it was a 55mm equivalent, then at least that would be some half decent separation from the 22mm f2 (@35mm equiv). As is, having only 2 primes in the system at 35 and 45 equiv isn't really giving you a broad range of capabilities.

This is a classic macro focal length. A 90mm lens has much different and, in this case, limited use in my opinion. And, although the lens lineup is "small," it is far from limiting. The 11-22mm and 22mm lens are in some ways unmatched by more established systems.

@tkbslc It's for the market that wants to photograph things to put on ebay etc. Ideal for that and introduces high quality close up photography to a market which is much larger than that occupied by the traditional macro specialist.

It makes all the sense in the world to have small and light lenses to mount on a small and light system and yes, some fast portrait prime longer than 22 would be great - though I would rather have an aperture of 1.8 and a fast AF instead of a macro in that range.

"Who wants to carry a 22-28 pair of primes?"The same people that wouldn't mind to carry a FF 35mm and 50mm but can now do it with the "M" system at a fraction of the weight AND having a cool macro with incorporated light thrown in?

For argumentation sake, you've tried to make it sound like the 6mm difference is redundant in photography.

Lead: "Thanks to built-in LEDs and very close focusing abilities, Canon's 28mm F3.5 for EOS M offers a great place to start learning more about shooting macro."

This really promotes the idea that (Canon) mirroless is for the beginners, and real photographers use real cameras. This matches my idea of what is the target group of EOS M system. It also tells a lot about the (general?) attitude regarding mirrorless systems.

It's just part of the blindness and condescending attitude that this site and its audience display toward lower-spec cameras. They can't conceive of the idea that someone in a professional situation might have a need to choose a lighter or smaller camera over a larger or better specified model.

Still waiting for a review of Canon's great EOS-M line of cameras. A few are already released and sold through US channels. Please review them, a lot are interested to see how they stack up to it's competition (mainly E mount).

In defense of the micro-Nikkor 40 DX, it's a dSLR, F-mount lens. If the minimum focus distance was any shorter, you'd have to paint your subject onto the front element.

(That said, kudos to Canon here. I was expecting Nikon to do this first with a Nikon 1 macro with the LED ring light, but that died on the vine evidently. If you are going to have a mirrorless short macro lens with 1:1 or better, a built-in light is practically a requirement and I'm surprised it's not already a common feature.)

"Second, because the field of view is on the wider side, you'll have to get really close, which means depth of field will be incredibly shallow."

That is a misleading statement when it comes to macro work. If shooting at the same reproduction ratio and at the same aperture, the depth of field functions independently of field of view. In other words, your depth of field can be incredibly shallow on any lens if you are using same reproduction ratio and aperture.

"because the field of view is on the wider side, you'll have to get really close, which means depth of field will be incredibly shallow"That is not right. At close-up distances, the DOF only depends on the magnification ratio. So you will get the same DOF if you shoot with a lens having a longer focal length than this one, at a distance giving the same subject size (with the same aperture of course...)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

"All the trump cards held by the Micro-Nikkor fold when other features of the EF-M 28mm Macro are brought in to consideration, though. First, even though it is a wider FOV lens, its nearest focus distance is 3.7", nearly 3" closer than the Micro-Nikkor. Even taking the slightly longer field of view of the Micro-Nikkor in to account, the Canon is able to achieve a 1:1.2 reproduction ratio in "Super Macro" mode over the Nikkor's 1:1."

I have this lens and the difference between 1:1 and 1:1.2 is not that great and certainly not worth being 3" closer if comparing it to the NIkkor. On specs alone, the Nikkor is a better macro. Having the lights is definitely a plus for focusing but they are not powerful enough to make much of a difference if your subject is beyond 1:2 or you are using a narrow aperture.

I like this lens, an all-purpose one with a semi-wide field of view combined with decent macro options.

There seems to be a collective congenital problem with the guys at DPR. Why the hell does the weight need to be compared with Nikon D5500...? Why couldn't you compare it to a Canon 1300D or a 750D or something similar from the same stable.

Me too. I have an EOS-M, and it doesn't compete well with my Sonys in IQ, but running ML enables some great things. Now if only the folks giving EOS-M attention included more people who work at Canon.... ;-)

As well as reporting on the newest gear, we used the opportunity of visiting the CP+ show in Japan to sit down and talk to senior executives from the major camera and lens manufacturers. This year, we were fortunate enough to spend some time with Mr Go Tokura of Canon. Read more

Canon has dropped a trio of new cameras on the world - one mirrorless and two fixed lens - and we wanted to give you a quick summary of the most interesting features are for each of them. Keep reading if you've got a hankering for more about the EOS M10 or the PowerShot G5 X and G9 X. Read more

The Canon EOS M10 makes its debut with a new collapsible 15-45mm F3.5-6.3 IS kit lens, taking up residence below the more advanced EOS M3 in that company's mirrorless lineup. A replacement for the M2, the M10 offers an 18MP CMOS sensor, 3" 1.04M dot tilting touch screen LCD, built-in Wi-Fi with NFC and 1080/30p video recording. Read more

The Leica Q2 is a fixed-lens, full-frame camera sporting a new 47.3MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and replaces the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116), launched in 2015.

Fujifilm's GFX 50R takes the image quality from the existing 50S model and wraps it in a new body with new controls and a lower price of entry. Is that enough to tempt you to pick one up for yourself? Find out how the GFX 50R performs in our full review.

The Mavic Air hits the sweet spot for many drone users, combining compact size with high performance and good image quality. Find out what makes it so useful, and why it might just be the best travel-friendly drone on the market today.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Montana judge Dana L. Christensen has ruled the Republican National Committee did not infringe upon the copyright of photographer Erika Peterman after they took a photo from a Democratic candidate's Facebook page without permission and altered it to use in a derogatory promotional mailer.

Leica recently announced the Q2, a digital rangefinder with a fixed 28mm F1.7 lens. It's a heck of a lot of fun to shoot with, but is it right for you? Based on our time with the camera, and its specifications, we've examined how well-suited it is for common photography use-cases.

Now that our Panasonic Lumix S1R has final firmware, we couldn't wait to get out shooting with it - and we also tried the high-res mode, which combines files to get 187 megapixel images. Because sometimes, 47 megapixels just isn't enough.

Drones can be useful tools in urban areas, where they're utilized for everything from news reporting to building inspections, but flying in these areas requires careful preparation. Here's what you need to know to do so safely.